Are you inferring from that Sid that the rate of abortion in Ireland will go DOWN if there's a Yes vote? If you are, I honestly find that hard to believe. If that's not what your suggesting then it seems disingenuous to mention the point

I didn't infer that.

Should the proposed legislation be introduced, I would expect there to be a modest rise initially, then a falling back over the medium term, possibly, in time, even falling back to below the current rate. Abortion rates everywhere in Europe are declining because contraception is more widely avaliable and sex education is better.

The constant references to the UK are absolute scaremongering of the worst and highest order.

If that's not what you were inferring, what's the point of mentioning it?

I agree that comparisons with the UK are of little value since it's a different law in place and a different culture. Your own point is of a similar nature however.

Because it demonstrates that when access to safe, legal abortion is introduced, health outcomes for women improve, often dramatically so.

As they will here if it's introduced.

But health outcomes for women wasn't the point you made:

"And a key fact: Abortion rates in countries where abortion is banned or highly restricted have a higher abortion rate than countries where it is safe and legal."

Worldwide, they do.

Are you disputing this?

I'm not.

I asked if you were inferring if this would be the case in Ireland and you said you weren't. This being the case, what's the value in mentioning it?

This all came from the false "1 in 5" assertion and other links to the UK (where a far more liberal regime than is proposed for here exists). I think the facts presented go a long way to refuting the scaremongering of the No side that abortion rates will sky rocket here if the proposed new regime is introduced.

You can't hold the position that data from another jurisdiction is irrelevant if you then choose to use similar data to further your own argument

Are you inferring from that Sid that the rate of abortion in Ireland will go DOWN if there's a Yes vote? If you are, I honestly find that hard to believe. If that's not what your suggesting then it seems disingenuous to mention the point

I didn't infer that.

Should the proposed legislation be introduced, I would expect there to be a modest rise initially, then a falling back over the medium term, possibly, in time, even falling back to below the current rate. Abortion rates everywhere in Europe are declining because contraception is more widely avaliable and sex education is better.

The constant references to the UK are absolute scaremongering of the worst and highest order.

If that's not what you were inferring, what's the point of mentioning it?

I agree that comparisons with the UK are of little value since it's a different law in place and a different culture. Your own point is of a similar nature however.

Because it demonstrates that when access to safe, legal abortion is introduced, health outcomes for women improve, often dramatically so.

As they will here if it's introduced.

But health outcomes for women wasn't the point you made:

"And a key fact: Abortion rates in countries where abortion is banned or highly restricted have a higher abortion rate than countries where it is safe and legal."

Worldwide, they do.

Are you disputing this?

I'm not.

I asked if you were inferring if this would be the case in Ireland and you said you weren't. This being the case, what's the value in mentioning it?

This all came from the false "1 in 5" assertion and other links to the UK (where a far more liberal regime than is proposed for here exists). I think the facts presented go a long way to refuting the scaremongering of the No side that abortion rates will sky rocket here if the proposed new regime is introduced.

You can't hold the position that data from another jurisdiction is irrelevant if you then choose to use similar data to further your own argument

I'm not holding that position, far from it. All the available data would seem to indicate that the UK is an outlier. Yet the No side are using comparisons with it exclusively. I mention that the UK regime is far more liberal than here so as to highlight that it may not be the best comparison for here and what might happen here.

Maria Steen giving a masterclass in swatting away the Yes mob.A great point from the audience too. If people actually witnessed what happened during an abortion, they wouldn't be voting for it.Sid and Syferus will never address this. Instead they'll dress it up in cuddly language like 'compassion' and 'healthcare'.

Seeing as you've clearly decided to dip your toes into the water of this debate over the couple of days or so, what do you plan to do about 12 year old rape victims who are made pregnant?

Do you plan to force them to carry the pregnancy to term against their will?

This is the tactic, try and use the extreme edge cases to open the floodgates.

It's like a Ferrari drivers club campaigning to have all speed limits and speed bumps removed from our roads because they claim they may potentially slow down an ambulance if there was ever an emergency.

I have way more respect for people like Ruth Coppinger who at least admit they want an abortion free for all, instead of hiding behind obscure scenarios.

Attempting to deflect won't get you anywhere.

I answered your question on page 30 of this thread comprehensively.

Any chance you could answer the question I asked you? I've bolded it for your convenience.

Don't be trying to fake concern for the mythical 12 year old. You'd care for her about as much as you do for the unborn child, but if she helps deliver you abortionI'd favour the person being given counselling and support and giving the child up for for adoption.There are thousands of parents on the adoption waiting lists while thousands of healthy babies get destroyed every year. The vast majority of them perfectly healthy.

This sort of sh1te really shows how deluded people are with their own personal bias.

I agree with you that the UK data isn't very useful (at least not without a massive health warning). I believe sid is also of this opinion which is why I was wondering why he was quoting data from other jurisdictions as a key fact.

Don't be trying to fake concern for the mythical 12 year old. You'd care for her about as much as you do for the unborn child, but if she helps deliver you abortionI'd favour the person being given counselling and support and giving the child up for for adoption.There are thousands of parents on the adoption waiting lists while thousands of healthy babies get destroyed every year. The vast majority of them perfectly healthy.

This sort of sh1te really shows how deluded people are with their own personal bias.

Agree here. The adoption arguement is nonsense. The wishes and needs and wants of the thousands (is that true?) on adoption waiting lists has absolutely no relevance to the mother.

Another blatant display of how little a f**k some people actually care about the women involved in these cases.

Are you inferring from that Sid that the rate of abortion in Ireland will go DOWN if there's a Yes vote? If you are, I honestly find that hard to believe. If that's not what your suggesting then it seems disingenuous to mention the point

I didn't infer that.

Should the proposed legislation be introduced, I would expect there to be a modest rise initially, then a falling back over the medium term, possibly, in time, even falling back to below the current rate. Abortion rates everywhere in Europe are declining because contraception is more widely avaliable and sex education is better.

The constant references to the UK are absolute scaremongering of the worst and highest order.

If that's not what you were inferring, what's the point of mentioning it?

I agree that comparisons with the UK are of little value since it's a different law in place and a different culture. Your own point is of a similar nature however.

Because it demonstrates that when access to safe, legal abortion is introduced, health outcomes for women improve, often dramatically so.

As they will here if it's introduced.

But health outcomes for women wasn't the point you made:

"And a key fact: Abortion rates in countries where abortion is banned or highly restricted have a higher abortion rate than countries where it is safe and legal."

Worldwide, they do.

Are you disputing this?

I'm not.

I asked if you were inferring if this would be the case in Ireland and you said you weren't. This being the case, what's the value in mentioning it?

This all came from the false "1 in 5" assertion and other links to the UK (where a far more liberal regime than is proposed for here exists). I think the facts presented go a long way to refuting the scaremongering of the No side that abortion rates will sky rocket here if the proposed new regime is introduced.

You can't hold the position that data from another jurisdiction is irrelevant if you then choose to use similar data to further your own argument

The No campaign is based around false data from one particular other jurisdisction which has a different law to what is being proposed in this country.

They have cherry picked one other country, they have advanced false data.